The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 2 Subparag. 5 of the Road Traffic Act provides that “In order to clearly separate the direction of passage of the horse, the center line means a line indicated with safety signs, such as yellow solid lines and yellow yellow lines, or a facility installed with a medians or fence, etc. at the center of a road (in the case of a road divided into a sidewalk and a roadway, referring to the center line).” Article 13 Subparag. 3 of the Road Traffic Act provides that “The driver of a horse shall pass along the center (in the case of a road divided into a sidewalk, referring to the center line) of the road.” Article 3 Subparag. 1 and the former part of Article 3 Subparag. 2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents provides that “the person who commits a crime under Article 268 of the Criminal Act due to a traffic accident, in violation of Article 13(3) of the Road Traffic Act, shall be punished regardless of the intention of the victim.

As such, the Road Traffic Act requires the passage along the right side of the center line or the center line, and punishing traffic accidents caused by breaking the center line, is aimed at ensuring the safe operation and smooth traffic of the vehicle that operates in the opposite direction each other in compliance with each other. As such, in a case where the left-hand turn or the U-turn is allowed in any area of a road where the center line is installed with yellow solid lines or yellow yellow domin lines, and the center line is marked as a white domin line, a traffic accident that conflicts with the vehicle that operates in the opposite direction while driving in excess of the center line in order to make the left-hand turn or the U-turn pursuant to safety signs, such as the signal situation allowing the left-hand turn or the U-turn at that point.

Even if this is not the case, it is not the case of central crime under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (a) around 22:15, on June 15, 2015, the Defendant driving a BK5 car and driving it for Category C at Andong-dong-si; and (b) from the upper side to the interest of the law.